<script src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/npm/lodash@4.17.15/lodash.min.js"></script>
var collection = [1, 2, 3, 4, 1, 2, 3, 4, 1, 2, 3, 4, 1, 2, 3, 4, 1, 2, 3, 4, 1, 2, 3, 4, 1, 2, 3, 4, 1, 2, 3, 4, 1, 2, 3, 4, 1, 2, 3, 4, 1, 2, 3, 4, 1, 2, 3, 4, 1, 2, 3, 4, 1, 2, 3, 4, 1, 2, 3, 4, 1, 2, 3, 4, 1, 2, 3, 4, 1, 2, 3, 4, 1, 2, 3, 4, 1, 2, 3, 4, 1, 2, 3, 4, 1, 2, 3, 4, 1, 2, 3, 4, 1, 2, 3, 4, 1, 2, 3, 4, 1, 2, 3, 4, 1, 2, 3, 4, 1, 2, 3, 4, 1, 2, 3, 4, 1, 2, 3, 4, 1, 2, 3, 4, 1, 2, 3, 4, 1, 2, 3, 4, 1, 2, 3, 4, 1, 2, 3, 4, 1, 2, 3, 4, 1, 2, 3, 4, 1, 2, 3, 4, 1, 2, 3, 4, 1, 2, 3, 4, 1, 2, 3, 4, 1, 2, 3, 4, 1, 2, 3, 4, 1, 2, 3, 4, 1, 2, 3, 4, 1, 2, 3, 4, 1, 2, 3, 4, 1, 2, 3, 4, 1, 2, 3, 4, ]
_.mapValues(collection, () => "a")
Object.keys(collection).reduce(
(acc, item) => ({
acc,
[item]: "a",
}),
{}
)
--enable-precise-memory-info
flag.
Test case name | Result |
---|---|
_.mapValues(collection, () => "a") | |
Object.keys(collection).reduce( (acc, item) => ({ ...acc, [item]: "a", }), {} ) |
Test name | Executions per second |
---|---|
_.mapValues(collection, () => "a") | 43020.8 Ops/sec |
Object.keys(collection).reduce( (acc, item) => ({ ...acc, [item]: "a", }), {} ) | 32801.5 Ops/sec |
I'd be happy to explain the benchmark and its options.
Overview
The provided JSON represents a JavaScript microbenchmark test case for the mapValues
function from the Lodash library, as well as a custom implementation using the reduce()
method with object destructuring. The test measures the execution speed of these two approaches on a large dataset.
Benchmark Definition
The benchmark definition is divided into two parts:
mapValues
: The first part defines a test case for the Lodash mapValues()
function, which applies a given value to each key-value pair in an object. In this case, the value is a function that returns the string "a"
.reduce()
method and object destructuring.Options Compared
The two options being compared are:
mapValues
: This is the built-in function from the Lodash library, which provides a efficient and reliable way to map values in an object.reduce()
method and object destructuring.Pros and Cons
Here are some pros and cons of each option:
Lodash mapValues
Pros:
Cons: None mentioned in the benchmark definition.
Custom implementation using reduce() with object destructuring
Pros:
Cons:
reduce()
and object destructuringOther Considerations
The benchmark definition mentions that the test uses a large dataset, which can impact execution speed. The choice of language and environment (in this case, JavaScript) also affects the results.
It's worth noting that the custom implementation using reduce()
with object destructuring is not a conventional way to achieve this result in JavaScript. The Lodash library provides an optimized implementation that takes care of many details, making it a reliable choice for performance-critical applications.
Other Alternatives
If you were to implement a similar benchmark for other functions or libraries, here are some alternatives to consider:
forEach()
method or a library like Ramda.reduce()
method, but also explore libraries like Lodash or Underscore.js.Keep in mind that each implementation has its own trade-offs and advantages. It's essential to evaluate the specific requirements of your project and choose the best approach for performance, readability, and maintainability.